With American education under threat, we have to remember where we've been
May 17th marked 71 years since the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision affirmed that education must be available and equitable to all. Yet the Department of Justice's recent removal of 1960s era safeguards to monitor school desegregation in Louisiana, and potentially other southern states, threatens the spirit of that landmark ruling.
Further, education is facing other serious challenges across our country, at underfunded public schools and well-endowed colleges and universities alike. One of the greatest challenges is an attack on the very foundation of education via the ongoing threats to free thought and critical inquiry.
Without these essential tenets, we weaken our collective ability to reach our full potential as individuals and as community. We run the risk of misremembering the past, not understanding our present and moving into the future without clear purpose or direction.
More: Tennessee sees surge in books banned in public schools. Here's which ones and why
Elementary and secondary education are at the heart of this struggle. This is where students learn about the trials and tribulations of our country—and where they learn to question, empathize and think critically, so that they can become engaged citizens as adults.
When these opportunities are minimized for young people, we are all lessened.
Higher education is not immune. Universities—traditionally places for open dialogue and rigorous debate—are under increasing pressure to curtail discussions on diversity and inclusion. Professors and students who challenge conventional perspectives face growing resistance. And even our most prestigious institutions are being pushed toward a simplified version of education that hesitates to confront uncomfortable truths.
This moment demands reflection on who we aspire to be in the future, as well as a collective resistance to return to where we've been in the past. It's about preserving the American tradition of free inquiry and robust debate. After all, a healthy democracy relies on citizens who can think independently, engage respectfully with different viewpoints and hold leaders—and each other—accountable.
Institutions like the National Civil Rights Museum play a vital role in maintaining this spirit. The Ruby Bridges Reading Festival, for example, provides children with access to important books by established and emerging authors, including many whose works are being banned elsewhere.
Opinion: Tennessee can teach American exceptionalism and also end its book ban frenzy
A museum Freedom Award honoree, Ruby Bridges is a civil rights activist who was the first Black student to integrate an all-white elementary school in New Orleans in 1960, when she was just six years old. Bridges was born in Mississippi in 1954, the same year the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision ordering the integration of public schools.
The Festival, named in her honor, is a commitment to ensuring future generations understand the full story of our nation's struggles and achievements.
History shows us that when education is constrained, societies become more vulnerable to division and authoritarianism. When curiosity and empathy are discouraged, the foundations of community and democracy weaken.
Protecting education is a shared responsibility. It means ensuring that our schools and universities remain places of truth, inquiry and understanding. It means supporting teachers, empowering students and encouraging leaders to champion open dialogue rather than fear.
Freedom starts with an educated mind. By investing in honest education, we invest in a stronger, more resilient America. The stakes are high.
Together, we must choose a path of hope, unity and thoughtful engagement.
Dr. Russ Wigginton is the president of the National Civil Rights Museum at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee.
This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Education is under attack in the US. We can't forget history. | Opinion
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
15 minutes ago
- Associated Press
The Justice Department seeks voter and election information from at least 19 states, AP finds
NEW YORK (AP) — The requests have come in letters, emails and phone calls. The specifics vary, but the target is consistent: The U.S. Department of Justice is ramping up an effort to get voter data and other election information from the states. Over the past three months, the department's voting section has requested copies of voter registration lists from state election administrators in at least 15 states, according to an Associated Press tally. Of those, nine are Democrats, five are Republicans and one is a bipartisan commission. In Colorado, the department demanded 'all records' relating to the 2024 election and any records the state retained from the 2020 election. Department lawyers have contacted officials in at least seven states to propose a meeting about forging an information-sharing agreement related to instances of voting or election fraud. The idea, they say in the emails, is for states to help the department enforce the law. The unusually expansive outreach has raised alarm among some election officials because states have the constitutional authority to run elections and federal law protects the sharing of individual data with the government. It also signals the transformation of the Justice Department's involvement in elections under President Donald Trump. The department historically has focused on protecting access to the ballot box. Today, it is taking steps to crack down on voter fraud and noncitizen voting, both of which are rare but have been the subject of years of false claims from Trump and his allies. The department's actions come alongside a broader effort by the administration to investigate past elections and influence the 2026 midterms. The Republican president has called for a special prosecutor to investigate the 2020 election that he lost to Democrat Joe Biden and continues to falsely claim he won. Trump also has pushed Texas Republicans to redraw their congressional maps to create more House seats favorable to the GOP. The Justice Department does not typically 'engage in fishing expeditions' to find laws that may potentially have been broken and has traditionally been independent from the president, said David Becker, a former department lawyer who leads the nonprofit Center for Election Innovation and Research. 'Now it seems to be operating differently,' he said. The department responded with an emailed 'no comment' to a list of questions submitted by the AP seeking details about the communications with state officials. Requests to states vary and some are specific Election offices in Alaska, Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, Utah, and Wisconsin confirmed to the AP that they received letters from the voting section requesting their statewide voter registration lists. At least one other, Oklahoma, received the request by phone. Many requests included basic questions about the procedures states use to comply with federal voting laws, such as how states identify and remove duplicate voter registrations or deceased or otherwise ineligible voters. Certain questions were more state-specific and referenced data points or perceived inconsistencies from a recent survey from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, an AP review of several of the letters showed. The Justice Department already has filed suit against the state election board in North Carolina alleging it failed to comply with a part of the federal Help America Vote Act that relates to voter registration records. More inquiries are likely on the way There are signs the department's outreach isn't done. It told the National Association of Secretaries of State that 'all states would be contacted eventually,' said Maria Benson, a NASS spokeswoman. The organization has asked the department to join a virtual meeting of its elections committee to answer questions about the letters, Benson said. Some officials have raised concerns about how the voter data will be used and protected. Election officials in at least four California counties — Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego and San Francisco —said the Justice Department sent them letters asking for voter roll records. The letters asked for the number of people removed from the rolls for being noncitizens and for their voting records, dates of birth and ID numbers. Officials in Arizona, Connecticut, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Rhode Island and Wisconsin confirmed to the AP that they received an email from two department lawyers requesting a call about a potential 'information-sharing agreement.' The goal, according to several copies of the emails reviewed by the AP, was for states to provide the government with information about instances of election fraud to help the Justice Department 'enforce Federal election laws and protect the integrity of Federal elections.' One of those sending the emails was a senior counsel in the criminal division. The emails referred to Trump's March executive order on elections, part of which directs the attorney general to enter information-sharing agreements with state election officials to the 'maximum extent possible.' Skeptical state election officials assess how to reply Election officials in several states that received requests for their voter registration information have not responded. Some said they were reviewing the inquiries. Officials in some other states provided public versions of voter registration lists to the department, with certain personal information such as Social Security numbers blacked out. Elsewhere, state officials answered procedural questions from the Justice Department but refused to provide the voter lists. In Minnesota, the office of Secretary of State Steve Simon, a Democrat, said the federal agency is not legally entitled to the information. In a July 25 letter to the Justice Department's voting section, Simon's general counsel, Justin Erickson, said the list 'contains sensitive personal identifying information on several million individuals.' He said the office had obligations under federal and state law to not disclose any information from the statewide list unless expressly required by law. In a recent letter, Republican lawmakers in the state called on Simon to comply with the federal request as a way 'to protect the voting rights of the citizens of Minnesota.' Maine's secretary of state, Democrat Shenna Bellows, said the administration's request overstepped the federal government's bounds and that the state will not fulfill it. She said doing so would violate voter privacy. The department 'doesn't get to know everything about you just because they want to,' Bellows said. Some Justice Department requests are questionable, lawyers say There is nothing inherently wrong with the Justice Department requesting information on state procedures or the states providing it, said Justin Levitt, a former deputy assistant attorney general who teaches at Loyola Law School. But the department's requests for voter registration data are more problematic, he said. That is because of the Privacy Act of 1974, which put strict guidelines on data collection by the federal government. The government is required to issue a notice in the Federal Register and notify appropriate congressional committees when it seeks personally identifiable information about individuals. Becker said there is nothing in federal law that compels states to comply with requests for sensitive personal data about their residents. He added that while the outreach about information-sharing agreements was largely innocuous, the involvement of a criminal attorney could be seen as intimidating. 'You can understand how people would be concerned,' he said. ___ Fields reported from Washington. Associated Press state government reporters from around the country contributed to this report.
Washington Post
15 minutes ago
- Washington Post
The Justice Department seeks voter and election information from at least 19 states, AP finds
NEW YORK — The requests have come in letters, emails and phone calls. The specifics vary, but the target is consistent: The U.S. Department of Justice is ramping up an effort to get voter data and other election information from the states. Over the past three months, the department's voting section has requested copies of voter registration lists from state election administrators in at least 15 states, according to an Associated Press tally. Of those, nine are Democrats, five are Republicans and one is a bipartisan commission. In Colorado, the department demanded 'all records' relating to the 2024 election and any records the state retained from the 2020 election. Department lawyers have contacted officials in at least seven states to propose a meeting about forging an information-sharing agreement related to instances of voting or election fraud. The idea, they say in the emails, is for states to help the department enforce the law. The unusually expansive outreach has raised alarm among some election officials because states have the constitutional authority to run elections and federal law protects the sharing of individual data with the government. It also signals the transformation of the Justice Department's involvement in elections under President Donald Trump. The department historically has focused on protecting access to the ballot box. Today, it is taking steps to crack down on voter fraud and noncitizen voting, both of which are rare but have been the subject of years of false claims from Trump and his allies . The department's actions come alongside a broader effort by the administration to investigate past elections and influence the 2026 midterms. The Republican president has called for a special prosecutor to investigate the 2020 election that he lost to Democrat Joe Biden and continues to falsely claim he won. Trump also has pushed Texas Republicans to redraw their congressional maps to create more House seats favorable to the GOP. The Justice Department does not typically 'engage in fishing expeditions' to find laws that may potentially have been broken and has traditionally been independent from the president, said David Becker, a former department lawyer who leads the nonprofit Center for Election Innovation and Research. 'Now it seems to be operating differently,' he said. The department responded with an emailed 'no comment' to a list of questions submitted by the AP seeking details about the communications with state officials. Election offices in Alaska, Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, Utah, and Wisconsin confirmed to the AP that they received letters from the voting section requesting their statewide voter registration lists. At least one other, Oklahoma, received the request by phone. Many requests included basic questions about the procedures states use to comply with federal voting laws, such as how states identify and remove duplicate voter registrations or deceased or otherwise ineligible voters. Certain questions were more state-specific and referenced data points or perceived inconsistencies from a recent survey from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, an AP review of several of the letters showed. The Justice Department already has filed suit against the state election board in North Carolina alleging it failed to comply with a part of the federal Help America Vote Act that relates to voter registration records. There are signs the department's outreach isn't done. It told the National Association of Secretaries of State that 'all states would be contacted eventually,' said Maria Benson, a NASS spokeswoman. The organization has asked the department to join a virtual meeting of its elections committee to answer questions about the letters, Benson said. Some officials have raised concerns about how the voter data will be used and protected. Election officials in at least four California counties — Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego and San Francisco —said the Justice Department sent them letters asking for voter roll records. The letters asked for the number of people removed from the rolls for being noncitizens and for their voting records, dates of birth and ID numbers. Officials in Arizona, Connecticut, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Rhode Island and Wisconsin confirmed to the AP that they received an email from two department lawyers requesting a call about a potential 'information-sharing agreement.' The goal, according to several copies of the emails reviewed by the AP, was for states to provide the government with information about instances of election fraud to help the Justice Department 'enforce Federal election laws and protect the integrity of Federal elections.' One of those sending the emails was a senior counsel in the criminal division. The emails referred to Trump's March executive order on elections , part of which directs the attorney general to enter information-sharing agreements with state election officials to the 'maximum extent possible.' Election officials in several states that received requests for their voter registration information have not responded. Some said they were reviewing the inquiries. Officials in some other states provided public versions of voter registration lists to the department, with certain personal information such as Social Security numbers blacked out. Elsewhere, state officials answered procedural questions from the Justice Department but refused to provide the voter lists. In Minnesota, the office of Secretary of State Steve Simon, a Democrat, said the federal agency is not legally entitled to the information. In a July 25 letter to the Justice Department's voting section, Simon's general counsel, Justin Erickson, said the list 'contains sensitive personal identifying information on several million individuals.' He said the office had obligations under federal and state law to not disclose any information from the statewide list unless expressly required by law. In a recent letter, Republican lawmakers in the state called on Simon to comply with the federal request as a way 'to protect the voting rights of the citizens of Minnesota.' Maine's secretary of state, Democrat Shenna Bellows, said the administration's request overstepped the federal government's bounds and that the state will not fulfill it. She said doing so would violate voter privacy. The department 'doesn't get to know everything about you just because they want to,' Bellows said. There is nothing inherently wrong with the Justice Department requesting information on state procedures or the states providing it, said Justin Levitt, a former deputy assistant attorney general who teaches at Loyola Law School. But the department's requests for voter registration data are more problematic, he said. That is because of the Privacy Act of 1974, which put strict guidelines on data collection by the federal government. The government is required to issue a notice in the Federal Register and notify appropriate congressional committees when it seeks personally identifiable information about individuals. Becker said there is nothing in federal law that compels states to comply with requests for sensitive personal data about their residents. He added that while the outreach about information-sharing agreements was largely innocuous, the involvement of a criminal attorney could be seen as intimidating. 'You can understand how people would be concerned,' he said. ___ Fields reported from Washington. Associated Press state government reporters from around the country contributed to this report.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Judges are scrutinizing the latest mismatch between White House deportation rhetoric and DOJ's position in court
Homeland Security officials did not respond to requests for comment. A White House spokesperson, Abigail Jackson, did not directly respond to questions about the discrepancy between Miller's comments and the administration's position in court. 'The Trump Administration is committed to carrying out the largest mass deportation operation in history by enforcing federal immigration law and removing the countless violent, criminal illegal aliens that Joe Biden let flood into American communities,' Jackson said. A Justice Department spokesperson said there is no disconnect between the DOJ's court filings and the White House's public statements. 'The entire Trump Administration is united in fully enforcing our nation's immigration laws and the DOJ continues to play an important role in vigorously defending the President's deportation agenda in court,' the DOJ spokesperson said. Immigration advocates have pointed to reports about the daily 3,000-arrest quota as proof that the administration's most extreme tactics — ones they contend violate due process and other constitutional or legal principles — are the result of a single-minded drive to hit numerical targets. Judges have pointed to those reports as well, figuring them into the analysis of whether the administration's tactics are legal. The existence of the target has created particular complications in the case challenging the immigration sweeps in Los Angeles. The administration is fighting an order that a federal judge issued last month prohibiting ICE from conducting 'roving' immigration arrests based on broad criteria such as presence at a home improvement store or car wash. The claim of a quota featured prominently in oral arguments at the 9th Circuit last week on the administration's bid to overturn that order. And when the 9th Circuit ruled Friday night, leaving the order largely intact, the judges seemed to highlight the contradiction by quoting the entirety of DOJ's denial and then taking note of Miller's statement to Fox about a 'goal.' The three Democratic-appointed judges assigned to the case said the vague factors ICE appeared to be relying on 'impermissibly cast suspicion on large segments of the law-abiding population, including anyone in the District who appears Hispanic, speaks Spanish or English with an accent, wears work clothes, and stands near a carwash, in front of a Home Depot, or at a bus stop.' During the arguments Monday, the appeals judges assigned to the case pressed the Justice Department for an answer on whether ICE officers were under pressure to meet some numerical target that might encourage them to detain people based on grounds that fall short of the 'reasonable suspicion' the law required.
